Allowed

FPA-PMLA-429/HYD/2012 of G. Ashwini Raja v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad

ATFP28 Nov 2017FPA-PMLA-429/HYD/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed three appeals filed against the confirmation of provisional attachment orders, relying on a binding High Court judgment that discharged the appellants for offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

What did the court decide?

The appeals filed against the impugned order confirming the provisional attachment were allowed.

FPA-PMLA-429/HYD/2012 of G. Ashwini Raja v/s The Deputy Director… — Money Laundering | ATFP (2017)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PREVENTION OF MONEY LAUNDERING ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 28.11.2017

¶3

FPA-PMLA-428/HYD/2012 Shri Gadi Nagavekata Satyanarayana … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent FPA-PMLA-429/HYD/2012 G. Ashwini Raja … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent FPA-PMLA-430/HYD/2012 N. Rajkumar … Appellant Versus The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad … Respondent

¶4

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶5

For the appellant : Shri Shishir Mathur, Advocate For the respondent : Shri S.A. Saud, Advocate CORAM JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH : CHAIRMAN SHRI ANAND KISHORE : MEMBER

¶6

FPA-PMLA-428/HYD/2012, FPA-PMLA-429/HYD/2012 & FPA-PMLA430/HYD/2012

¶7

FPA-PMLA-428-429-430/HYD/2012 Page 1 of 4

¶8

By this order, we propose to decide the above-mentioned appeals filed against the impugned order by which the provisional attachment was confirmed.

¶9

The brief facts are that a FIR being RC No. 01(A)/2009 dated 06/01/2009 was registered by CBI against the Appellant in Appeal no. FPA-PMLA-428/HYD/2012 (for short hereinafter refer to as Satyanarayan) under Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and a charge sheet on 29.06.2010 i.e. after 07.06.2009 when it was a scheduled offence from same was filed before trial court. It was alleged that during check period 01/01/1995 to 31/08/2007, Appellant acquired D.A of Rs. 45,94,769/-. 3. In the year 2011, Respondent lodged ECIR and started investigating the matter and a Provisional Attachment Order No. 03/2012 in ECIR no. 03/HZO/2011 was passed by Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad. Subsequently the said order was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority vide impugned order dated 19/11/2012.

¶10

The allegation against the appellant, Sri GNV Sataynarayan (who was Govt. employee and for short it would be referred as Satyanarayan) were that on 29/05/2007 & 31/05/2007 a total of 49 Dhanchakra Deposits Certificates were made under fictitious names totaling an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- with Lakshmi Vilas Bank Malkajgiri Branch with a common nominee as GNV Satyanarayan (Father of Appellant). The other appellants are relatives of the Mr. Sataynarayan.

¶11

It is also alleged by the Respondent that a loan of Rs. 17,50,000/was taken by Appellant’s son, G Ashwinin Raja against the collateral security of above-mentioned 49 Dhanchakra Deposits Certificates. Further that loan was released vide two pay orders dated 29/05/2007 and 01/06/2007 to be paid to M/s Aditya Constructions Company Pvt. Ltd. for purchase of a Flat No. 303 at Aditya Odyssey, Silpa Park,

¶12

FPA-PMLA-428-429-430/HYD/2012 Page 2 of 4

¶13

Kondapur Village/Serilingampally Mandal & Muncipality. The said property was registered under Sale Deed document No. 49030/08 registered on 05/07/2008. It is also alleged that the said deposits were subsequently liquidated by the Appellant and utilized for the purchase of property bearing No. 101, Jai Residency at Jagir Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Hyderabad in name of N Raj Kumar, Brother-in-Law of the appellant. The Flat No. 303, Aditya Odyssey was sold in 2012 to Anil Samayam under Sale Deed document no. 3629/12 registered on 29/03/2012 with a market value of Rs. 62,00,000/- and the balance of which has been put as FDR in name of Appellant’s son i.e. G Ashwini Raja, amounting to Rs. 39 lakhs in HDFC Bank, Kapra Branch, Chanakyapuri, Hyderabad. It has been also alleged that respondent is unable to trace an amount of Rs. 9,04,412/-.

¶14

The following properties were attached by the Respondent which are described as under:

¶15

i. Flat No. 101 in Jai Residency in Manikonda Jagir Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, RR Distt. (near Dargarh)- Panchvati Layout, Plot No. 1 38 & 39, having a registered value of Rs. 26.00 lakhs belonging to Shri N. Raj Kumar.

¶16

ii. Fixed deposit at HDFC, Kapra Branch Sainikpur= Rs. 39,00,000/(Maturity Date: 24/06/2012) Account No. 01264470125901 created out of Saving Bank Account No. 05451140099441 held in name of Shri G. Ashwini Raja.

¶17

Admittedly during the pendency of appeals, the appellants have filed an application for placing on record judgment dated 14.09.2017 passed in Crl. Rev. case no. 1770/2015 by High Court at Hyderabad. As per settled law, the decision passed by the higher court is binding upon us.

¶18

The respondent in these cases had also filed a complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 before the concerned Special FPA-PMLA-428-429-430/HYD/2012 Page 3 of 4

¶19

Court at Hyderabad against the appellant and his relations. In the said complaint the court has issued summons to the Appellants and subsequently on their appearance applicants who moved discharge application before the court, the same was dismissed.

¶20

The appellants challenged the order of dismissing discharge application in a criminal revision case no. 1770/2015 before the Hon’ble High Court at Hyderabad. By judgment dated 14.09.2017, the Hon’ble High Court has allowed the petition and consequently discharged the Applicant and others from the complaint case filed by Respondent.

¶21

In para no. 11 and 12 of the aforesaid decision dated 14^th September, 2017 the Hon’ble High Court of Hyderabad has observed as under: -

¶22

11. In the light of the observations made by this Court in the above judgment coupled with the Judgment of the Delhi High Court, this Court is of the view that the petitioners cannot be proceeded against under sections 3 and 4 of the Act 2002. The trial court has failed to consider all these legal aspects and therefore, the order impugned is liable to be set aside.

¶23

12. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed setting aside the order of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad in Crl. M.P. No. 418/2014 in C.C. No.: 3/2014, dated 1.7.2015. Consequently, Crl. M.P. No.: 418/2014 in C.C. No.: 3/2014 is allowed discharging the petitioners-1 to 3 in C.C. No. 3/2014 for the offence under section 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

¶24

In view of the aforesaid decision dated 14^th September, 2017 of the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh discharging the appellants for the offence under section 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the present appeals are allowed.

¶25

(Anand Kishore) Member

¶26

New Delhi, 28^th November, 2017

¶27

‘D’

¶28

FPA-PMLA-428-429-430/HYD/2012 Page 4 of 4

FPA-PMLA-429/HYD/2012 of G. Ashwini Raja v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

FPA-PMLA-429/HYD/2012 of G. Ashwini Raja v/s The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases